Adsite Limited v Sports Kenya
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to enforce a billboard lease because the advertiser never paid the rent it had promised.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether there was a binding enforceable contract between the parties
Although a lease was executed, the contract suffers for want of consideration because the plaintiff never paid the annual rent
The court found a lease dated December 2, 2016 executed by both parties, with clause 7 fixing annual rent of Kshs 1,050,000/=. However, there was no evidence that this consideration was ever paid. A contract lacking consideration cannot support specific performance, and the plaintiff seeking equity was itself in breach.
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance
No - specific performance was refused because the contract lacked consideration and the plaintiff had not performed its own obligations
Relying on Reliable Electrical Engineers v Mantrac and Gurder Singh Birdi, the court held specific performance is discretionary and unavailable where the contract is defective or the claimant has not performed its essential obligation. The plaintiff failed to pay rent, so equity would not assist it.
Whether the plaintiff proved its case on a balance of probabilities
The plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof under Section 107 of the Evidence Act
The defendant did not participate, but the plaintiff still had to prove its case. The court found no proof that the plaintiff complied with its obligations or that the defendant breached the lease, so the claim failed on a balance of probabilities.
Legal principles established
#- Specific performance is a discretionary equitable remedy granted only where a valid enforceable contract exists and damages are inadequate
- A party seeking equitable relief must have performed its own essential obligations under the contract
- He who asserts must prove; the burden under Section 107 of the Evidence Act lies on the plaintiff
Court orders
#- 1.The suit is dismissed
- 2.No orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution (Environment and Land Court) - implied by the court's subject matter; not expressly stated in the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Adsite Limited v Sports Kenya", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case 277 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/18470/eng@2023-03-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.